entelechy

As someone who conducts interviews regulary - tools like this worry me a lot. In my experience most interviewees are very awkward when using these tools thought. They usually take a lot of time to give answers to even simple questions and often seem to read things off the screen. Nevertheless worrying and i'm sure some learn how to hide their use better

mostly strace and it's macos equivalent; Later we moved to ptrace and ebpf. LD_PRELOAD unfortunately doesn't work for statically linked libc. There are also kernel probes but didn't like that it required root permissions...

Love it! We did something similar using strace/dtruss back in 2018 with https://buildinfer.loopperfect.com/ and were generating graphs (using eg. graphviz and perfetto.dev) and BUCK files on the back of that

Whilst we regrettably never came around to package it as a propper product, we found it immensly valuable in our consulting work, to pinpoint issues and aid the conversion to BUCK/Bazel. We used graphviz, https://perfetto.dev/ and couple other tools to visualise things

Recently we cicled back to this too but with a broader usecase in mind.

There are some inherent technical challanges with this approach & domain:

- syscall logs can get huge - especially when saved to disk. Our strace logs would get over 100GB for some projects (llvm was around ~50GB)

- some projects also use https and inter process communications and that needs ot be properly handled too. (We even had a customer that was retriving code from a firebird database via perl as part of the compilation step!)

- It's runtime analysis - you might need to repeat the analysis for each configuration.

Indeed I didn't remember it correctly:

According to https://tfhe.github.io/tfhe/ states:

> Each binary gate takes about 13 milliseconds single-core time to evaluate, which improves [DM15] by a factor 53, and the mux gate takes about 26 CPU-ms

Addition of two bits can be implemented using 5 binary gates (fulladder) Hence to add 2 32 bit numbers ~416ms => 2 additions per second

EDIT: Shame I cannot edit my original post

ohh interesting! Are there any opensource implementations of homomorphic numerical processing?

Were there any efforts of combining both approaches?

Great work! This allows to perform arbitrary computation on untrusted devices.

However last time I checked computation in this scheme is ridiculously slow: on modern machines, cutting edge implementation of FHE manage to get around 100 integer operations per second.

Never the less there have been some brave startups trying to commercialise this technology:

https://venturebeat.com/2020/02/18/enveil-raises-10-million-...

Other interesting things build on top of FHE:

sql database where data and queries are fully encrypted: https://github.com/zerodb/zerodb

fully encripted brainfuck vm: https://github.com/f-prime/arcanevm

doesn't work for me: "IP could not be resolved"

The story behind the fake company: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTHg-tGvlJ8

> What's your take on Bazel?

Here a couple key points:

- Buck and Bazel are very similar.

- Buck currently models C++ projects better [1].

- Buck leverages remote caches currently better than Bazel [3] - Bazel is very easy to install

- Bazels "toolchains" make it very easy to onboard newcomers (to any project and language) but also ensure the build will run as expected.

- Bazel is less opinionated and more extensible than Buck.

In fact Bazel is so powerful that you can have Buildfiles that download a package manager and use it to resolve more dependencies. This is great to get things off the ground, but makes things less composable because the package manager won't see the whole dependency graph. As a result you might get version conflicts somewhere down the line.

To summarize: I think having a very opinionated build-system is easier to reason and scales usually better.

Communities with very opinionated packaging and build-systems are proving this by having orders of magnitude more packages that eg. the highly fragmented C++ community where configuration is prefered over convention.

> Have you considered offering support in Bazel for your package manager?

Yes we did. As soon as this feature [1] is implemented we will have a 1:1 mapping for C++ Buck Projects and Bazel. Then after a small (automated) refactoring of our Buckaroo packages, you should be able to build any package from the Buckaroo ecosystem with either Buck or Bazel.

Btw. The cppslack community is attempting to create a feature matrix of various build-systems here [2]

[1] https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel/issues/7568

[2] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1y5ZD8ETyGtxCmtT9dIMDTnWw...

[3] https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel/issues/7664

No but this will be covered by buckaroo [1]

[1] https://github.com/LoopPerfect/buckaroo/issues/314

The C++ community started a comparison of various buildsystem a while ago: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1y5ZD8ETyGtxCmtT9dIMDTnWw...

Overall Buck and Bazel are quite similar as they are both converging to Starlark DSL.

However there are still some differences: Buck is much more opinionated than Bazel. Buck models slightly better C++ projects[1] and currently it's remote cache is more efficient[2].

Bazel is more extensible and offers also remote execution. Bazel has a bigger community and it's roadmap is public.

There has been more than 350 C++ [4] libraries been ported to Buck for the Buckaroo Package Manager[3].

There are also technical details that manifest in some odd ways but are not significant. There is a nice paper by Simon Peyton Jones (creator of haskell) and others that goes into the design details [5]

[1] https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel/issues/7568

[2] https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel/issues/7664

[3] https://github.com/LoopPerfect/buckaroo

[4] https://github.com/buckaroo-pm

[5] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/uploads/prod/2018/0...

Happy to go more into detail if desired

We think Buck is great. It's Deterministic hermetic builds and it's composable and declarative high-level build description language made packaging very easy. We built even built a package manager for Buck: https://github.com/LoopPerfect/buckaroo

Currently we marketing it for C++ but it can be used for any language that is supported by Buck.